[asterisk-users] Why Nat=yes Nat=no Option?
Eric "ManxPower" Wieling
eric at fnords.org
Wed Nov 12 23:09:34 CST 2008
Alex Balashov wrote:
> Steve Totaro wrote:
>> I have done some large installs where people are going to be in the
>> office, sometimes out, work from home, it always changes sorta thing......
>> I have found that setting all device profiles to Nat=yes "Just Works"
>> whether they are on the LAN or not and this is even on larger scale
>> systems with hundreds of "phones".
>> Is there any reason why this would be frowned upon as a default? Even
>> to the point of, if nat= is not specified, it would default to yes?
>> Is there a performance hit somewhere, or some other downside?
>> If not, I suggest making it the default.
> The premise of nat=yes is that the domain portion of the Contact URI is
> overridden with the real, received source IP of the request and that the
> default expectation of port 5060 (if not specified in the Contact URI)
> is dropped in favour of the actually received source UDP port.
> Similarly for SDP (without SIP-aware ALG).
> I think the reason this would be frowned upon as a default is
> philosophical in essence; by default, per the RFC, a SIP UAC is
> expected to behave such and such way, i.e. use the Contact URI that
> arrives in a REGISTER request and/or INVITE. Overriding that with the
> received IP:port is a "hack" around prescribed behaviour, and enabling
> hacks as default behaviour is generally considered a bad idea.
IIRC Uniden phones do not (or did not at one time) work with nat=yes if
they were not NAT'd.
Consulting and design services for LAN, WAN, voice and data. Based near
Birmingham, AL. Now accepting clients worldwide. Contact me for Tellabs
echo canceling systems. Also see http://www.fnords.org/skillslist.html
More information about the asterisk-users